Upwardly mobile: Sony a6300 Review

The Sony a6300 is the company's latest mid-range mirrorless camera. Like the a6000 it still offers 24MP resolution but the autofocus ability, video capability, build quality, viewfinder resolution and price have all been increased.

The most exciting change from our perspective is the a6300's new sensor. Although the pixel count remains the same, the a6300's sensor has a whopping 425 phase-detection AF points ranged across the sensor. The a6000 already offered one of the best AF systems in its class, when it comes to identifying and tracking subjects, so an upgrade in this area sounds extremely promising. The sensor is also built using newer fabrication processes that use copper wiring to help improve the sensor's performance and possibly contributing to the camera's slightly improved battery life.

The a6000 has been a huge success and has dominated its field to the extent that its combination of capability and price still looks impressive even as it enters the twilight of its career (Sony says it will live on, alongside the a6300*). That model represented a dip down-market for the series, with a drop in build quality and spec relative to the NEX-6 that preceded it. The a6300 corrects that course, and sees the model regain the high resolution viewfinder and magnesium-alloy build offered by the older NEX-6 (and the level gauge, which was absent from the a6000).

Key features:

24MP Exmor CMOS sensor

425 phase detection points to give '4D Focus' Hybrid AF

4K (UHD) video - 25/24p from full width, 30p from smaller crop

2.36M-dot OLED finder with 120 fps mode

Dust and moisture resistant magnesium-alloy body

Built-in Wi-Fi with NFC connection option

Built-in microphone socket

As with the previous 6-series E-mount cameras, the a6300 features a flip up/down 16:9 ratio screen. The shape of this screen hints at the 6300's intended uses: video shooting, as well as stills. The a6300's movie features have been considerably uprated. It not only shoots 4K (UHD) at 24p or 25p from its full sensor width (or 30p from a tighter crop). It also gains a mic socket, the video-focused Picture Profile system (which includes the flat S-Log2 and S-Log3 gamma curves), and the ability to record time code.

This added emphasis on video makes absolute sense, since the camera's stills performance is likely to be competitive with the best on the market but its video capabilities trounce most of its current rivals. The a6300 not only includes focus peaking and zebra stripes but, if its on-sensor phase detection works well, the ability to re-focus as you shoot with minimal risk of focus wobble and hunting, should make it easier to shoot great-looking footage.

All this makes it hard to overstate how promising the a6300 looks. A latest-generation sensor can only mean good things for the camera's image quality and an autofocus system that moves beyond the performance of one of our benchmark cameras is an enticing prospect. Add to that excellent, well-supported video specifications, a better viewfinder and weather-sealed build, and it's tempting to start planning for the camera's coronation as King of the APS-C ILCs. Perhaps with only the price tag floating over proceedings, threatening just a little rain on that particular parade.

Specifications compared:

As well as comparing the a6300 with the a6000 as its predecessor/sister model, we'll also look at what you get if you save up a bit more money and opt for full-frame, rather than APS-C. We think at least some enthusiast users will find themselves making this decision, so are highlighting the differences.

Sony a6000

Sony a6300

Sony a7 II

MSRP (Body Only)

$650

$1000

$1700

Sensor size

APS-C (23.5 x 15.6mm)

APS-C (23.5 x 15.6mm)

Full Frame (35.8 x 23.9 mm)

Pixel count

24MP

24MP

24MP

AF system

Hybrid AF (with 179 PDAF points)

Hybrid AF (with 425 PDAF points)

Hybrid AF (with 117 PDAF points)

Continuous shooting rate

11 fps

11 fps

5 fps

Screen

3" tilting 921k dot LCD

3" tilting 921k dot LCD

3" tilting 1.23m dot LCD

Viewfinder

OLED 1.44M-dot

OLED 2.36M-dot w/120 fps refresh option

OLED 2.36M-dot

Movie Resolution

1920 x 1080 / 60p

4K 3840 x 2160 / 30p, 1920 x 1080 / 120p, 60p

1920 x 1080 / 60p

Image stabilization

In-lens only

In-lens only

In-body 5-axis

Number of dials

Two

Two

Three (plus Exp Comp.)

Maximum shutter speed

1/4000 sec

1/4000 sec

1/8000 sec

Built-in flash

Yes

Yes

No

Hot shoe

Yes

Yes

Yes

Flash sync speed

1/160 sec

1/160 sec

1/250 sec

Battery life(with EVF)

360 shots (310 shots)

400 shots(350 shots)

350 shots(270 shots)

Weight (w/battery)

344 g (12.1 oz)

404 g (14.3 oz)

599 g (21.1 oz)

Dimensions

120 x 67 x 45 mm (4.7 x 2.6 x 1.8 in.)

120 x 67 x 49 mm (4.7 x 2.6 x 1.9 in.)

127 x 96 x 60 mm (5 x 3.8 x 2.4 in.)

A hit-for-six, slam-dunk, home-run?

If it's successful in its attempts to step up from the performance of the a6000 then the a6300 could be sensational. However, there are three questions that we'd like to see addressed. The first relates to handling: why does a camera costing this much only have one dial that you can access without changing the position of your grip? The rear dial isn't the worst we've encountered, but at this price point, we'd usually expect to find a dial under the forefinger and another under the thumb while maintaining a shooting grip.

The second relates to lenses. Sony is bundling the a6300 with the 16-50mm power zoom that's far more notable for its convenience than its optical consistency, a move that's likely to raise the question of what other lenses to fit. Sony offers a handful of reasonably priced APS-C-specific prime lenses as well as some more expensive FE-compatible full-frame primes. However, in terms of standard zooms, you're currently limited to the inexpensive 16-50mm, the older 18-55mm at aftermarket prices or considerably more expensive options such as the 18-105mm F4 or the 16-70mm F4 Zeiss that costs around the same amount as the camera again. The success of Sony's full frame a7 cameras is only likely to improve third-party lens availability but there's a risk that Sony's focus will be on those full frame users for the foreseeable future.

Our final concern is the lack of joystick or touchscreen to re-position the AF point. This may be mitigated during stills shooting if the lock-on AF system works well enough (starting AF tracking and then recompose your shot in the knowledge that the AF point will stay where you want it), but it appears to be a real omission for refocusing while shooting video. The a6300 is improved over previous models, in that pressing the center button on the four-way controller toggles into AF point selection mode, a decision that's retained even if you turn the camera off and on again. We'll see how significant all these concerns turn out to be, as the review unfolds.

Price and kit options

The 16-50mm power zoom is far more notable for its convenience than its optical consistency.

The a6300 body has a suggested retail price of $1000/£1000/€1250, with a 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 power zoom kit commanding an MSRP of $1150/£1100/€1400. This is a significant step up from the a6000's $650/$800 launch price and even an increase compared to the similarly well-built NEX-6's $750/$900 MSRP.

Review History

17 March 2016

Intro, Specs, Body and Handling, Operations and Control and Studio Comparison published

*Unusually, the manufacturer's claim that it'll live on, alongside its apparent replacement model seems plausible. The differences in spec and price could allow them to sit fairly comfortably alongside one another, rather than the claim simply meaning 'we'll keep saying it's a current model until most of the unsold stock has gone, to avoid angering retailers.'

Comments

I bought 3 of these when they came out. My intention was to use them for shooting inside of cars on reality shows. I thought I could rig these up and shoot scenes using this camera as I would use a go pro for dialogue scenes. Well I was disappointed, it only records for about 20 minutes before it overheats and shuts down. That may seem like a long time, but I have never worked with a "reality" producer that says cut. So 20 minutes just does not work for my needs. The record button for video is poorly designed. The kit lens is difficult to use and not very good. The menu is more difficult to use than any camera I have put my hands on. When your in manual there are still functions that are operating on auto. I am sure I could get better at it, but overall I am very disappointed. I really wanted to like this camera, but to use it requires a large investment of time to learn the menu and navigate quickly.

A lot of production crews shot with the original Canon 5D back in the day. It would overheat within a matter of minutes and so they kept a cooler with a bunch of bodies nearby to be able to swap them out as needed. You are faulting this camera for it's known limitations. Is there another camera that does what you are asking and does it better? Maybe you should accept the limitations and learn the menu. Ultimately, that's what any photographer/videographer should do. And while you are at it, customize the buttons to make it your own. It might help to take it with you throughout the day, shoot some and tinker with the menu until you are familiar with it. If you don't want to deal with any of this, stick with the go pro. That's what it is for.

Overheating: Has been an issue since the 5n, or when 1080p recording was introduced in NEX. With sundry workarounds, e.g., unfold the LCD, attach cooling fans and sunshades, etc.

As many other high-powered gizmos today, getting rid of the TDP heat in small plastic bodies is not trivial w/o heatpipes, fans or fluid or Peltier coolers. It ain't enough thermal mass and/or enough heat exchange surface --aka heatsink-- exposed to the ambient...!

I think most peoples' posts are interesting and worthy points of view. What that person says may not be totally in line with what you might think but their life experience is real and true. Thankfully it may not absolutely apply to your life but it may give you valuable insight.

As far as buying 3 cameras "on impulse" -- I can say many companies with billions of dollars of resources might chose to buy something "off the self" due to time constraints, for example. Also, if you have a decent gig you might be working with a few grand and it's your job to make it happen. Grabbing 3 brand new cameras might not be a bad idea if you can get the cutting edge shots for your project plus the gig might pay for everything.

Hi, I am wondering if someone can help me to decide the best camera solution for my needs. Currently I own an Olympus Pen-2 with couple of lenses. I use it to shoot events, travel, holidays and leisure but of course my aim is to make brilliant, high resolution and amazing images. The main needs is to have a camera that should not be noticed by most people (otherwise people get distracted)...., that has a fast enough burst rate (around 8 fps), HDR built in, EV manual controls, at least 16 megapixels, a sensor with truly low noise in shadow. The Panasonic GX8 and the Olympus Pen-F where the initial solutions (maybe Panasonic better because its more accurate focusing and frame/second), but than I got a bit puzzled by Canon PowerShoot GX-7, Fuji xPro-2, Sony a6300... Mmm, what shall I do? Are those other cameras offering betters image quality in terms of low noise, manual controls and overall features?

Thorgrem, you describe the FF opportunity very negatively. For those who wants to have the possibility to grow into full frama camera shooting by gradually getting FF lenses to the APS-C system, the Sony mirrorless system provides that. In some other mirrorless brands you are locked in with your investment in the smaller format lenses. For those brands you cant evolve in terms of changing format.

Well rich07, I beg to differ. Its perfectly fine if you don't see your own way forward evolving to full frame. But how can you answer for all other humans that they will never go from APS-C to FF?? Or that they would ever chose to have an APS-C and a FF from same brand but for differentierad pusposes, and thereby reuse the lenses. Can you predict the stock market as well?

Dpreview, here's a suggestion to stop all this whining about the rating system: why don't you have separate ratings for photo and video abilities of each camera? That way you might have something like this:

Search google capture one 9 Sony express, it's the free version that converts Sony RAW files. Works very well too if you don't want to spend money, it's missing local adjustment features though. Then you can upgrade within the program to PRO for $50.

I wouldn't think that's a wrong decision at all but I would suggest buying all those lenses would be a mistake. If it's just general shooting you do then a prime of choice for light weight and portability plus a standard zoom 24 70mm (equiv) would be the way to go.

Thanks, Sean. I am with you and would probably start just with the 30 mm f1.4. I composed this list to assure myself that I won't bankrupt along the road because I need a specific lens. Anyway, after some research, there are more lens options for sony than I thought initially (at least for a casual shooter like me) which makes me more comfortable to get into this system.

Yeah right. Like you would use ALL the features ALL the time. Everyone will have different needs and could easily customise the camera to taste. I can't imagine any photographer or videographer needing easy access to EVERYTHING, ALL the time.

As an Owner.. I have no problem using the camera. I reconfigure many of the buttons. Set up the Function Menu for fast access. Even use the EVF LCD mode for fast access. Rarely need to touch the deeper menus when shooting. And only Micro 4/3rds has more lens options than Sony E-mount if you look at the list of current lenses for the system in B&H.. So really its much better than the "never touched it, never researched it" crowd likes to say.

Lens support is not a quality of the camera body, it's a quality of the system to which the camera belongs. This is not a system review, it's a camera review. You need to judge for yourself if the system as a whole meets your needs.

Imagine giving a lens a bad review because there's a poor selection of bodies to use it with. Wouldn't that be absurd?

@K E HoffmanGreat to find out you are the Owner. So others - keep mum…..Great, but look to yourself. Be calm.DSLRs, also a camera system. I think you owned one. A compact camera needs compact supportive system also. A class leading sensor alone can't be a class leading camera.

Not sure why people complain so much about Sony lens support. I have the Sony 18-105/4 OSS, 35/1.8 OSS, 50/1.8 OSS, 55-210 OSS, and Rokinon 12/2 for my A6000. All these lenses perform well, and I'm very happy. And I'm saying this as a Canon DSLR user. BTW, I also adapt my Canon EOS lenses to my Sony A6000, too. Sony mirrorless bodies are the most adaptable cameras in the market, so you have a huge range of lenses you can use with them. As for user friendliness, I actually find the size and portability of my Sony gear make it more user friendly, which is probably why I use my Sony gear 80-90% of the time, my Canon gear 10-20% o the time. For travel, I only use my Sony gear because I find it travels so much better than my DSLR gear. Doesn't that count as "user-friendly"? It does to me!

People also have to remember that the Sony system is very young. Systems need time to grow. Canon's EOS system was nothing when it was introduced in 1986. It did not become "world class" overnight.

Supposedly 400 shots per charge (CIPA), so improved compared with the a6000. I didn't find I had to be constantly worrying about keeping a second battery charged - though I've ended up getting into the habit of constantly plugging cameras in, having reviewed a couple of sub-300 shot per charge cameras (shudder).

Anyway, I'm leaving the office now. The Nettle Ale is being tapped tonight, so I'm off to try a pint.

I shoot over 1200 shots on the A6300 during a 9 hour event. Used three batteries down to about t15-20% each before I swapped them. Lots of EVF and LCD time waiting for moments to happen in my subject area. NO Flash.. rarely use flash But about 500 shots per battery seems real world in my experience. If you sit for 2 hours in the menus learning the camera you get about 100 shots :)

under normal lighting, RAW setting, the D7200 is finer grained slightly in all colors, but look carefully at the pink and blue for example, the d7200 edges it out just a hair. In the lowlight setting, the a6300 seems to ever so slightly edge out the d7200 in the shadows, most likely due to a tiny discrepancy in exposure, but again the d7200 seems to be slightly cleaner on the color checker, green ferns upper right. Nearly a tie, but slightly in favor of the D7200 overall..IMO

And the D7200 records lossless compressed 14-bit RAW Files..you can also switch to just 12-bit RAW, if you want, like the D7000, choose from just compressed (lossy) or lossless compressed - Sony can't give us that with their current Firmware for their APS-C series...

I continue to be puzzled by the 14-bit versus 12-bit issue. If you are shooting in continuous mode but only take one shot, does the capture still drop from 14-bit to 12-bit? And if the raw is compressed to 11/7 or whatever Sony's compression scheme is, does it even matter whether the original capture was 14-bit or 12-bit?

The A6300 really deserves optically from IQ-terms a much better "kitlens" than the average, mediocre SEL-1650P Powerzoom lens. Please, Sony! It was already not a good match onto the A6000 & NEX-6 predecessors.

I have two of these 16-50s and am happy with them. I find the lens to be much better than many say. (I always shoot raw and use DXO for conversions so that may be a factor.) It is very inexpensive and very compact. Size and weight for a carry around camera was my primary importance. Edge sharpness is the least important to me. I did not buy the Nex 7 when it came out because its kit lens was too large for what I wanted in a compact camera.

In addition the power zoom allows me to zoom via remote control when camera is flying on my quadcopter.

So do i...two of them, and Edge Sharpness is critical, especially for landscape or architecture shots. Without the digital corrections, or say here DxO via RAW (i choose PTlens for PS, Plugin) the Distortions are absolute horrible, the worst i've ever seen, into wideangle. (at 16mm) The SEL-1670Z Zeiss is no alternative, it does have it's own issues, and the IQ, especially the corners, are worse.

I like my 16-50 too. It is super compact, which means I can get it into the Lowe bag (with shoulder strap and belt loop) that will otherwise only fit with the 35/1.8. This means I will actually have the camera with me when I'm out with the family and I still have both hands free when I need them. The best camera is the one you have with you and for me the 16-50 makes a meaningful difference in size to the point where I will actually take the camera with me. If I want better quality and/or shallower depth of field and/or better low light, I use a prime lens. I also have a RX100, which is quite a bit more compact and has higher resolution sensor. It too has it's place, but the picture quality of my Nex-6 with the 16-50 is perceptively better, which makes it a worthwhile choice if size is not at an absolute premium

I do not always correct the distortion. it is very good to have barrel distortion when people are near the edges. I sometimes use DXO to add barrel distortion (anamorphosis) to my "distortion free" lenses.

I am an architectural shooter and I do use high quality TSE and prime lenses on my Canon for most assignments. However if you consider most shots of homes or buildings, the corners consist of sky, grass, roads, etc... stuff you don't need incredibly detailed. Interiors often have blank walls, ceilings, and floors in these areas.

I have been using the a6000 with 16-50 kit lens along with 55-210 for a number of projects and the results are excellent.

I sometimes get assignments from ad agencies to show the amenities in a neighborhood. These lenses are fine for that. Here is an assignment I shot last week using those two inexpensive lenses:

Dpreview nails this by saying how the kit lens is best described for its convenience rather than by its image quality. I would add that it is also best described as a fancy end cap and desktop paperweight. I would expect to be in the market for a decent zoom when purchasing a camera in this price bracket. It is also nice to have any lens to be able to start shooting right out of the box.

I find all the whining about the DPReview ratings amusing; they are just one of many sources of equipment reviews and opinion. If you don't think it should be "Gold", start your own review site and give it a "Silver" rating!

Anyone notice that there are like vertical strips on the back wall between the picture frame and the lamp of the black and white area of the old women in a rocking chair, with the a6300, a6000, a5300 and it is not present in no other camera I can find. There is even horizontal stripes on the woman's standing face.

Well it's seem the painting is made of vertical strips in fact ! (for those looking it's the studio test scene, the b&w cartoon part).You see them with Nikon D750 too. With Canon 5DSR you see plenty of moiré like a rainbow...

That's the lovely thing about that part of the test scene: it has lots of different frequencies that are prone to aliasing (higher frequencies than can be correctly rendered appearing instead as false patterns within the domain that the camera can render).

To get a clearer idea of what it really looks like, you can always check against our current reference camera.

The question is: how serious is each of those and what proportion of users will be affected?

The Lock-on AF can be erratic if confronted with lots of similar (non-human) objects in a similar plane. Mainly close-up. But most of the time AF's really impressive. I've not seen a camera do so well in our bike test or close-up face test.

Dropping to 12-bit and only offering compressed Raw is annoying but it only affects you when you're shooting wide dynamic range scenes (you can often avoid the 12-bit modes when you need to).

Risk of overheating - disastrous if you're expecting it to shoot for long periods, not a problem if you're shooting short clips to edit together.

Lack of external charger - feels a bit cheapskate but can be overcome.

I'm not trying to justify those failings: I highlighted them specifically because I believe they're factors that people might want to consider. But I don't think every user will be affected by every Con, whereas most of the Pros could benefit everyone.

Please FOCUS! I bought the a6300 and I find it as the most featured, advanced, high quality camera I ever had, that I can actually DROP IN MY POCKET, go and shoot great photos and movies without hauling heavy gear or a backpack. I believe this is the design philosophy behind this neat package and it deserves correctly the Gold in this class!May be $200-$300 more expensive than it should be and the kit lens could be a better one, but again is so compact and its images can be easily improved in Lightroom.

Fair enough Richard but I feel like I've seen dpr knock cameras down to Silver for similar shortcomings in the past. I suppose if the a6300 is one of THE BEST cameras in its price-point and category, Gold might be warranted, but still.

JackM - it was a close-run thing. There are a couple of cameras recently that we've spent ages discussing Gold or Silver and this was definitely one of them. In the end the capability argument won the day, but we're not blind to the camera's faults.

"Risk of overheating - disastrous if you're expecting it to shoot for long periods, not a problem if you're shooting short clips to edit together."

How many short clips can you film in quick succession before the camera overheats because from what I have seen in your review it was not tested? i.e. a 45 second scene that you want to do several takes of. Or a party for instance. How many scenes can it do which will be edited together later with short breaks in-between before it overheats. If you only film short scenes but you film many of them overheating could still be an issue. Plus with no built in IS to the camera body it does rather restrict video use. Something that you failed in mention as a con.

Aside from the a6300, I really think that the D7200 should have received the gold award for no other reason than being the camera that set such a high benchmark with its sensor technology. Not to mention that it is an all round amazing photographic tool along with being reasonably light and compact for a DSLR.

The problem is that the D7200, while very strong in some areas, isn't stand-out better than most of its rivals if you consider a broad range of uses. Our awards have to be based on a generalized use-case (to be meaningful for the broadest number of people looking at cameras in that part of the market).

The D7200 would be a Gold with the proviso 'if you're only interested in DSLRs and don't want to shoot video' which limits its meaning to too small a group of people.

If you're in that group of people, then I understand why you think it would be a Gold. But looking at what the cameras at that price can do, the D7200 isn't as all round amazing as you say.

Maybe DP needs to separate, cameras are reviewed by photographers, video cameras are reviewed by videographers and now maybe they need an all in one category since there are many photographers left and many all in one people now a days that have different needs. I think camera companies are forgetting their purpose and losing sales to over generalizing themselves, making the camera menus to complex to be great photographing tool because they are lined with features that get in the photographers way. Even a hasselblad with 4K, who is going to buy a 30k medium format camera to only be able to shoot 20 min clips. Since for government generalization purposes in order to be a camera and not video camera it needs to cut off at a certain amount of time. Or give a rating for photographing use separate from video use and than a combined at the end.

@Richard Butlerexactly, for people like me, only shooting stills, not video, the D7200 "D7000 Mk. III" would be gold, and is, was the only true D7000 Successor, the D7100 back into its day...not so much...too little, too late. But..still, being happy with the D7000. At least, Nikon does have some decent DX lenses coimpared to Sony APS-C line, even they could finally really do a 23/1.8G DX, so 35mm/1.8 in FF-terms.

I have to agree with Don, only a small percentage of d7200 owners use it for video. Anyway I respectfully disagree on some of the awards, but you bring up valid points, and we can all go on and on over this. In the end though, both are very capable cameras and suit different needs.

Good idea to split the reviews into video and photo. Makes me laugh hearing about how amazing a camera is because it shoots 4k. Like the 4K coming out of a D5 (for example) is akin to the 4K coming out of a Red, or even an FS7. In truth, an 8-bit 4:2:0 file out of a top end dslr is going to be inferior to C300 Mark I footage AFTER upscaling the latter to 4K.

I've owned NEX and Alpha line cameras; they are great consumer friendly devices with good image quality, even with the lower priced lenses available. Enthusiasts can use them with better glass if they can tolerate the camera's shortcomings. Having said all that, the Nex-7 was the best of the line ergonomically speaking and Sony abandoned further development opting to go with the full-frame models. That said, I'd not spend a dime on the a6300 given that you can and will continue to be able to purchase the full-frame Sony models for at/arount this price point.

The comments here reflect the fact that this is going to be a highly emotionally charged time over the next 5 years or so. Most of the "enthusiast" camera market is old men. Old people don't like change as much as younger people do and dslrs are going to be dying off, like a lot of their die hard fans. We can see now the shape of things to come: the electronic adapters for Canon and Nikon will become perfect and cheap, offering essentially the equivalent of native lens capability and better features than when the lenses are used with the brand for which they were built. From nowhere on that 2 years ago we're now well on the way. So these Sony bodies and maybe a few others will be the universal body. People can go on shooting with dslrs, and buying them, as long as they want, but, in the context of an overall terrible camera market, they will inevitably become passe, not the best you can buy. The SpeedGraphic of the era.

"-Lock-on AF can be erratic (failing to distinguish chosen target)-'Live View' in 8 fps mode shows only static image between captures-Drops to 12-bit mode in various modes inc. continuous shooting and silent shutter-Risk of overheating limits use for extended recording periods-Lack of external charger makes it hard to keep a spare battery charged-Lossy compression of Raw risks occasional artifacts"....

Cameras with rap sheets like this won't be putting DSLRs out of business any time soon. How any camera with no external charger and with "erratic" lock-on AF gets a GOLD award is beyond me. I hate the tinfoil hat crowd who claim conspiracy and bribery, but I can't defend dpreview this time.

Trouble is DSLR's still outsell mirrorless and new photographers including students studying photography are still buying them. All those young press photographers are using/buying them and so are all those young pro sports photographers.

I am old but I like changes. I hate when things do not change or develop or are at a standstill.There is nothing that aggravates me more than manufacturers sitting on their buts and not developing and improving tech.Every new camera or piece of tech should have lots of improvements.

Old men? Old people don't like change? What a conceited, derogatory and narrow minded point of view. This 67 year old man is as likely to shoot with his smart phone as with his A6000 or D800 and is eagerly awaiting the arrival of a mirrorless camera to rival a DSLR in capability and robustness but it hasn't arrived yet from what I see, when it does I'll be the first to get one.

PieterB yes there is nothing wrong with that either but EVF's are far from perfect yet. Plus Sony are still thinking like an electronics company than a camera company. It will be interesting to see how the camera side copes when it is split from the sensor business. If it does not stand up on it's own then Sony will close it in a heart beat.

I'm an old guy struggling to read this type face, but it seems you are saying it's only the young like change, but as they all look the same, dress the same, learn the same cr*p on some made-up college course, I'll have to disagree.Time for bed now, skydiving again tomorrow.

Whether or not you like evf's is for a large part personal preference. The first time I used an evf, I was in love with it. I never want to go back to a d-slr. I was always chimping, glasses off, take a shot, glasses on to view the image, glasses off etc. Now I see the picture just after taking it. I love evf's.Besides, the high end pentaprisms on high-end d-slr's are good but a lot of the cheaper options have awful OVF's

i also had 3 Sony mirrorless, 2 nex and 1 A7, still have them, and my Nex-5 (the first from Sony) still work like the day i unboxed it, they all do, the A7 was bought used, and no problem of any kind, very good build quality!

I on the contrary have so many Nex cameras....which I find various problems. However, I believe Sony has been doing a lot in improving their qualities and A6300 is what we see after year's of effort by Sony.

Like Danny, my E-mount cameras are well used and not treated like trophies - they've been scraped, scuffed, rained on, coated in dust & sand, and have gone through tens of thousands of actuations. Never had a problem with my previous 3 E-mount bodies, as I'm now on a 4th one. None were flimsily made. We can each only base on our own experiences - mine have been flawless.

My oldest NEX is the orginal NEX-5, back from 2010...and doing quite well, low shutter count. Then the NEX-6, A3000 & A7. No issues with all.

But i must admit, i do like by far much more the handling of my D7000 into my hands. Still, the EVFs onto the NEX-6 & A7 are nowhere to be good...yet. Flickering, i have sensible eyes...and get much more eye strain with EVF, than with an OVF. It lags, it flickers, color-flicker, and also the grain into low light...ts nothing compared a good OVF.

I have Nex5, 5nx2, 5r, 5t 6, 3n. All have been used extensively by me up to the mountains, down to the sea. All were brutally abused with scratches here and there and even the newer A6000 cannot escape its destiny. I fell with the camera and the 10-18 lens once and brought a6000 to the coldest stormy hike I ever had. Guess what all cameras and lenses work like a charm.

I still have the original NEX-5 working flawlessly after ~45,000 shots. My NEX-5n is serving now other photographer passed the 60,000 shots. I have now one A6000 with more than 30,000 and another A6000 (relatively new) with over 5,000 shots. I had only one failure with NEX-5n (electronic failure).

CapturaNot exactly. Nex cameras to me are made by Sony as more toy like than conventional dSLRS are and I am always worrying about their build quality especially in adverse weather conditions and that's why I bought so many....in case one fails me I can use another. I reality their exceptional light weight (in terms of multiple bodies and lenses in one go) always attract me first when I go out for a shooting.... and I think I have been lucky not to have too many quality issues from Nex so far.

Yes I did. My backup camera to 5r is the 5T (back experience of flooding my 5n underwater) and my 5t frequently has this "card no found" error. From the internet I know it must be the card reading pin's fault. Other than that these little cameras are just fine, as fine as my other cameras.

So it sounds like mostly your apprehension. I still have and use my 5r quite often. The add-on EVF has superior resolution to the A6000 and works just fine for my eyesight. And I appreciate the easy lightweight handling, and flipping touchscreen. The low ISO performance and PDAF-assisted focusing is far better than on my NEX-7. But I don't like the way the screen has eroded.

I've not heard about the 5T having a "card not found" error before, maybe it's just bad luck with your particular camera. Is it too late to make a warranty claim?

Maybe I should.I moved on to A6K as my main backup camera to A7rII/and main camera for hiking. 5t/5r's low light focusing ability is not that great. Improvement is seen with A6K but still miles behind from dSLR. This is very frustrating in underwater shooting coz while your camera struggles for focusing, the very short window to shoot what you want too bebecomes even shorter.

In jpeg Sony gives a greenish cast, but remember Sony has amazing jpegs according to DP. Look at all the people shots in the gallery they all have strange and unpleasant greenish skin tones, just like the ones that were mentioned multiple times on the Leica Q but not at all on the Sony. Another con not listed.

I don't understand why people feel so offended... You don't like the camera ? Don't buy it ! That gold award doesn't make the silver award D7200 any worse, don't you think ? And there are tons of people who don't need a camera to be gold award on DPReview to buy it (otherwise, there wouldnt be so many brands selling). If you don't like the camera, fine, but this outrage is just completely appalling. If your only concern is that DPReview says your camera is the best, and not the A6300, go buy a therapy instead of buying new gear.

The issue some people have is the camera has a list of cons and some that are not even listed and still manages to get a gold. Sony will market this camera on the strength it got that gold award and people will purchase it based on that not realising the camera has problems.

I suppose all cameras have a list of cons. So this camera is not unique in that sense. What is unique is to provide top level technical photo quality (JPEG and RAW), and top level movie quality and tools, and top level autofocus performance (including eye focus), in such a small package and at that price point. It is hard to argue that does not deserve a positive evaluation. The mere fact that this camera in the rich commentary below is compared with the best mirrorless camaras and with the best APS-C DSLRs speaks volumes. This camera successfully address a broad usage of photography and filming. That is not to say that there aren't niches where other products aspects are more important.

Despite lossy compression RAW it still performs excellent comparred to mirrorless and DSLRs, see the review.

RAW image quality:looking a lot like the Nikon D7200 and slightly sharper than the EOS 80D.Noise-wise it looks a fraction better than the Nikon D7200, though the slight softening of the noise pattern suggests some noise filtering is being applied in the Raw files at ISO 12,800 and above. This performance is enough to keep it well ahead of the Canon. The similarity to the Fujifilm X-Pro2's output seems noteworthy.

RAW dynamic range:The Sony shows a touch more noise than the D7200 after a shadow push, suggesting its files are slightly less malleable than the Nikon's. That said, the D7200 is a class-leader in this regard among APS-C cameras, so this is a very good result. In fact, this performance still leaves it a little ahead of the Canon EOS 80D , despite the improvements Canon has made in this area

You can not compare the Sony a6300 with the Nikon D7200. The Achilles heel of Sony is and will remain the lenses, bad or too expensive. Why not speak of the camera + lens system? Sony a6300 is for beginner or novice amateur. It is amazing how the specialized media has tried to help Sony sell only bad solutions (remember BETAMAX). When someone says that had 5 or 6 NEXT is because something was not right. For 5 years, I have had a Nikon D7000 with great lenses and I am very satisfied. I know well the limitations of this camera but it works like clockwork. I intend soon to upgrade but I must continue with Nikon or go to Canon (Canon 5d mark iv). The rest is for amateur with lots of money to buy new toys every 6 months.

Its fine if you like your currynt camera and if you want to stay with your brand. If It delivers what you want then just be happy. No need to be angry on other brands if you are truly confident you made the right equipment choice for you. This site is about evaluating new equipment, and Sony brings new features and capabillites to the table. But perhaps your usage doesn't need new capabillity? Or you don't want to evolve your photography or filming with help of new equipment. Then perhaps there are other sites for you that don't focus on equipment revirews.

Some people get very nervous when the status quo is changed. Canon and Nikon not leading anymore in development makes a lot of people very nervous and makes some people getting unstuck. That is stupid. Competition is very good for everybody. Maybe Sony taking the lead will force Canon to get out the sofa and start acting and improving their cameras at a faster pace and doing a better job. Canon could have made tons of money exploiting the video options of the 5dmk3 successor, ony they didn't.

Given Sony's poor lens lineup for aps-c vs the D7200's ability to use virtually every lens Nikon has produced would be enough of a reason to give the D7200 Gold and the 6300 Silver. And most people who want to shoot video buy a video camera.

PieterB compared to Sony camera sales Canon are already making tons of money. The question should not be when will Canon react to Sony. It should be what happens to Sony if Canon do react. Because if they do react and bring something good out mirrorless wise it could have a devastating effect on Sony sales.

If, if, if. But anyhow, more competition is better than no competition. Canon brought out the 80D and it doesn't have 4k. So, they are hardly innovating, are they?The new Canon 80d is a solid camera but you can hardly call it innovative in any way. It is just a bit better than the it predecessor but that is it. I cheer every manufacturer on to innovate as much as they can. More choice for us.

Into technical, betamax was really he better system then JVC's VHS, but the market decided that VHS had won...please keep that in mind, before doing such comparsions, saying that Sony is sellling "bad solutions" is not the case, but the APS-C lens line from Sony is lacking decent lenses.

Used one for a day and it OVERHEATED during video. Shut down and became completely useless - you don't know how much that sucks until it happens to you. The grip gave my hand a cramp to with the two FE lenses I had. In real life use this camera was more uncomfortable to hold and use than most DSLRs, and the size which is not vastly different, didn't have any advantage. I still needed a bag for the lenses. Don't know why Sony gave up making small inexpensive lenses, but they did.

do you know that the A6300 has a battery grip for accessory? I have one for my A7RII and I use it all the time when combined with larger glass, unload I have a space /size constraint. Make my A7RII perfectly comfortable.

@EthanP99: A 20 minute limit means nothing whensome users are getting overheat problems in way less time than that. Sony has never been able to solve this problem with these small mirrorless bodies. The NEX-7 has an overheat problem that is unpredictable. And yes: I read the manual.

I have small hands so I have no problems with the backdial. It will probably be different if you have large hands. I have more trouble with really big d-slr's because of my small hands. The a77 is about the limit I can comfortably handle.

The 6300 DOES let you directly choose the AF point when in Flexible Spot mode. no more menu hunting. I verfied this when I had a chance to check it out at the Sony event at Samy's camera in March before it was released. Much better than my a6000

You have to lose grip on camera in order to turn the back dial. Selecting focus point is click click click click click click also while almost losing grip on camera. There is only one proper dial on this camera.

On NEX-7 and A7x cameras you can control everything without losing grip on the camera.

Yeah, I dunno. I still have pretty bad memories from my experiences with the NEX-5 and the NEX-7, especially when it came to dealing with Sony customer service. Without question Sony makes fantastic sensors. But the legacy camera companies seem to know how to build a body around those sensors, provide great lenses for those bodies, and process images captured by those great sensors consistently and markedly better than Sony ever has, IMHO. I'm all for MILCs, but I will probably wait until one of the more experienced players in the industry produces one which I really, really like. Valid or not, or truly pertinent or not, this review equivocates too much and concludes with more Cons than Pros, and I cannot ignore it.

@lemonadedrinker I sold my A600 and the 16-50/55-210 kit lens after 6 months. Although they looks good, in actual use the A6000 has many issues, the very poor battery life been the biggest one. The OSS on both lenses are sub par compares to the "legacy" brands and the 16-50 starts to make funny noise at power on. While the A6300 seems to have many improvements over the A6000, it is also cost a lot more and I am still not sure Sony can make reliable products and good lenses with comparable prices.

You need to pair the a6000 with a real lens like the 50mm f1.8 and 35mm f1.8 to show its power. the kit lens was never meant to be a true test of its abilities. just a convience for those who want a basic walk around lens. its an unfair test

I really liked my nex 6 a lot. I like the body of it much better than the newer models. The a6000 felt much more plasticy. I haven't tried the a6300. When I decided to back to crop sensor after the a7 I went with fuji just because I don't like the Sony mirrorless cameras an more. They are little bricks with few controls. I may just be tired of that nex body style. It is still the camera I recommend to my friends looking to get a nice mirrorless camera though. Works really well for those that don't change settings much.

So the A6300 falls short of the 2 year old NX1 without all its incredible FW updates that added cool features like IBIS for video and superior C-AF.

It is sad Samsung gave up because they are still far ahead of Sony. They even have REAL APS-C F/2.8 zooms and a great 85mm F/1.4 prime for over $1000 less than what Sony tries to charge! :D Oh well. Maybe in another two years Sony will finally make a better camera and good APS-C lenses.

So you are saying Canon is 3x better than Sony and that Sony A mount stinks because it is a failure?Samsung upper mgmt never took NX seriously, but as we all know they made a camera almost two years ago superior to even Sony's latest offering. btw, an A6300 with two F2.8 zooms from Sony costs over $6200....but it still can't match the NX1 with the two Samsung G zooms.

they already make a great camera and very good aps-c lenses. that is an asinine comment simply meant to be inflammatory. now if you want to say that their lenses are more expensive - then you would actually be correct, and have a valid point. otherwise you're comments have no merit.

I can't agree with you more but wait, Samsung has such a potential to develop become the greatest camera maker ever but they don't want do it any more. There is one thing we called commitment. Samsung guys are the first ones to master all these technology but when they see the market is shrinking, they are the first ones to quit.

Samsung (along with Intel) is the most advanced semi-conductor maker in the world, but can you blame them for leaving a shrinking market than in a few years may not be relevant? Oh, and Samsung is a major player in the market rapidly replacing the 'camera' market. Isn't that the better place to be?

Good observation, woodyggg. The NX1 was very fine indeed, but too large for the mirrorless market. The similar but much smaller NX500 was nearly perfect, except for one big mistake. Having no EVF, it was designed for the Korean market. But most of the world wants an EVF in that class of camera. Failure was the end result, due to this shortsightedness.

Quick question. I have the 18-55 lens that came with the NEX-5. Any comparisons of that lens with the kit lens from the 6300? I'm selling the NEX and need to decide which of these two lenses to offload with it. I mostly shoot with the SEL18200 (the original fat one) so the smallness of the kit lens might be more useful even if the old 18-55 is slightly better.

I had to do this test for myself as I upgraded from a NEX-5N to the A6300. Shooting RAW I noticed that most of my photos were muddy and lacked detail. After some hiccups getting Sony's software up and running and realizing the 18-55mm Kit needed a firmware I think I'm having a better shooting experience with that lens.

After seeing your question here, I intend to maybe put up comparisons of the 18-55 @50mm, with the 16-50mm @ 50mm, with the f1.8 50mm prime @ 50mm.

Beware the 16-50 lens is not as good as it looks. First, for a small lens, Sony's OSS was rather poor. Even worse is after only 6 months, the lens starts to make funny noise at power up. I promptly sold both A6000 and the lenses(had 55-210 too). The person at the used camera shop told me he has seem quite a few 16-50 lenses having the issue.

One thing to note about the 16-50mm kit vs the 18-55mm - though it is more compact, it is also a very different design both ergonomically and functionally. Because of the size, it's not quite as convenient for left-hand cradling while shooting - too little space for the hand for some...and because it's a compacting design, the powered zoom operation rather than manual ring may not be something you like. And when the camera goes into 'sleep mode', the lens will compact back into closed mode, and then have to open again when you wake the camera. If you're set to a quick sleep like 1 minute, that lens is cycling in and out constantly - this can be very annoying. I have stuck with the 18-55mm kit for this reason - I hate compacting/power zoom lenses.

So after two personal trips, one to DC and the other to San Francisco I can definitely say I am disappointed in the 16-50mm Compact Zoom. More often than not my photos are out of focus or blurry, even when set to aperture priority and shooting as wide open (f3.5) as possible. The photos themselves also are the furthest thing from sharp, and particularly muddy even on X.FINE JPG settings. RAW is even worse.

I need to find a decent zoom lens to replace the aging 18-55mm, and now that sigma has their own adapter out there, might it make sense to look outside of Sony's own lenses (and their ZEISS counterparts) in searching for a better camera/lens combo?

For all the people complaining about lenses, I haven't seen anyone state what are the many lenses that are missing - aside from supertele (400 mm+ zoom), and any primes >85 mm, and the fast zooms that are coming out now.

What else would you like? tilt-shift? Do you know esoteric that is? A 300 mm f/2.8? At $6,000 each I'm sure that'll be a huge seller.

Oh no, the kit lens isn't very good - so what? It's a kit lens, it's supposed to be cheap, not necessarily good. I get along fine with mine the few times I use it.

Well, what about such a basic thing as a standard zoom lens? Affordable, but good quality. Then where is the premium fast standard zoom? A fast wide angle prime? Long telephoto? Affordable 35mm equivalent prime?

@kolyy - I own the Sony 18-105/4 OSS (my standard zoom lens) as well as the Sony 35/1.8 OSS and Sony 50/1.8 OSS. All are very affordable and very good quality. As for a fast wide prime, I own the Rokinon 12/2, which is fast, excellent quality, and very affordable. Am I happy with my Sony setup? Absolutely. And I'm coming from the Canon DSLR world. I still own a ton of Canon DSLR gear, but the Sony gear is getting the most use. It's great to be a part of a system that has a bazillion lenses (such as Canon's), but at the end of the day, the thing that matters to me is which camera gear I choose to take with me when I'm leaving the house. And 90% of the time, it's my Sony gear that I'm taking with me. Besides, the Sony system is still maturing. In the grand picture, it's not been around that long.

salsaguy: those are quite nice for what they are (affordable moderate wide-angles with slow apertures), I actually shoot quite often with the Sigma 19mm. But they are not what I say is missing. Even if I accept the focal lenght, these are no substitutes for the likes of Fuji XF18mm F2 or the Panasonic Leica 15mm F1.7. And what if I wanted anything wider?

T3: These are some nice lenses, but once again, not what I say is missing. Those primes are not wide angle. The 18-105/4 is too big and expensive (and not kitted) to be considered as a substitute for a good quality standard kit lens. The aperture is too slow to be considered as an alternative to the F2.8 premium zooms and it's not weather sealed either.

Cosmin - weather sealed I agree with now that the a6300 is better sealed. I don't think f1.4 primes are big enough sellers to warrant Sony making a specific line for APS-C cameras, but hey, if that's what you need, Fuji's lenses are great.

Affordable good kit lens? The 16-50 is just fine and it already exists. I don't know what else is needed. You want it faster? It's no longer nearly as affordable for first party lenses for any mount. The 18-105 is only $600 - how much cheaper do you want for such a long f/4 lens?

With a-mount adapter you now have many great lenses available; with a Canon adapter you also have many great lenses available. I would not expect the kit lens to be good. In cases where the camera does have a decent kit lens you usually will pay for it in the end with increased cost.

To the dpreview folks: I think the next time you get the chance to sit down with Sony execs for an interview - the first question you should ask off the top is "Why did you release such a wonderfully capable camera body but no enhancements to you're APS-C lens lineup at the same time?".

Again, it really seems like the A6300 is meant to satisfy existing E mount customers, particularly those with a NEX-7, NEX-6, or A6000 rather than attract new ones. They said as much last summer when they outlined the direction that their camera division is going (most resources going to full frame) and the G master lenses sort of reinforce that.

@muscular. Not true at all. FF lenses don't work so good on subframe bodies. Look at the P-Mpix scores for the 70-200/4 for example. 23P-Mpix on the A7R (0.64 ratio) and only 11P-Mpix on the a6000 (0.46). The same lens does not resolve the same ratio on two different formats. Just watch some videos on Youtube to get the idea.

Speaking of which DPR, I have not seen or heard anything about Kimio Maki since last year. Does Sony's camera division have new management and if so, does that signal a change in direction for new products? For example, more new e-mount APS-C products, like the A6000?

The A7R/II has less MP than the A6000/A6300 at the same sensor area. You'd need between 50-55MP on FF to match it. That's why many FF lenses aren't as good on crop. All of the flaws are magnified. The only positive is cropping out the weakest part of the lens: the corners. Where the lens is the softest, and vignetting hits the hardest.

That's true but not the only reason FF lenses are weak on subframe bodies.

Using the 70-200 example again. Its 23P-Mpix on the A7R and 11P-Mpix on the a6000. If you do the math and account for sensor resolution, the A7R is 23/36=.64 or 64% of the sensor resolution is retained. On the a6000 it's 11/24=.46 or 46%. This indicates that the FE lens is less sharp on the a6000 crop sensor as it is on the FF A7R, relatively speaking. Mostly due to the fact that the image circle is larger and less light falls on a smaller sensor. Tony Northrup explains it quite nicely on Youtube if you care to watch his video.

A minority of Sony e-mount owners dislike the full frame cameras and would prefer if the "way forward" path would become a bigger choice of advanced APS-C cameras. Just as some Canon owners are disinterested in the full frame lineup and prefer the choices offered within the Rebel group.

@Peter The original post states there isn't enough APS-C native mount lenses. Yes, the 70-200 is 11P-Mpix, but look at the 16-70 zeiss at 8P-Mpix, the 18-105G at 9P-Mpix, the 55-210 at 6P-Mpix. All the native E mount performs worse than FE mount on APS-C sensor. Continue to believe u can only use Native mount, then continue to get less sharp images than otherwise. Going by DXOmark, we should all dispose our APS-C lenses and bodies.

@Muscular. If you want to spend upwards of $1700 (a6300 with 18-105) for a crop sensor camera and a lens that hobbles the sensor to only 9MP resolution then have at it. The Sony people will love your cash. You should also probably get the Sony 4K TV as well since you'll be shooting tons of 4K video, lol. That's another $1000 for "Upward Mobility".

Instead of being Upward, be Up and just buy an A7. I'm not telling anyone what to buy, that's just what I would do (actually have). To each his/her own.

I used to own the A7, sold it for its autofocus system, its lacking for the hobby im interested in (concert photography). The A6300 is capable enough, and I don't see 2x sharpness in real life. Dxomark is interesting and is a benchmark for comparing lenses. One might think FF is the way to go, but to get A6300's AF system on FF camera, there's only A7Rii, I would have gotten it in a heartbeat had it not been that expensive and would probably lose most of its value when mk3 is released.

Understandably so. I was almost into Nikon's DSLR, because while mirrorless is the "in" thing, being small but also capable, AF always had room for improvement. Previous mirrorless hunts too much in low light, but I believe the a6300 should be a surprise for u, try out at your local store if u have the chance.

Im here just for the reviews lol...I did have nex 5n in the past. Enjoyed it but sold for horrible focus performanceId go to sony again but at this price point sony should really revamp the menus add touchscreen and mostly importantly IBIS.THAT would be a camera i would have no problem buying. As it stands... market is very competitive nowadays and there seem to be better options overall

Such as pretty much anything else mirrorless out there that has much better lens selection.I dont need or want 4k in the camera i dont care about video. I buy camera to take photos. Wish sony omitted stuffing 4k into cameras that overheat after short while anyway and include better features for actual photography

Very wrong info, phase one with Sony who built the 100mp sensor, so it is partially Sony who is responsible for the 100mp 16 bit sensor with 15 stops. Next the 16 bit is true 16 bit not up sampled and very noticeably different than the 14 bit on a large enough sensor. I have the 50mp back with 16 bit and 14 stops and anyone who states they do not notice the difference is paid to state that or does not belong in photography. Sony makes great sensor just not user friendly cameras to put them into.

Sounds like nice camera. I might buy one, if they don't replace it with another model before I get to the store. The feature creep menus would knock it out of gold status for me, but that's Sony and I'm sure you can get used to them over time.

Anyway, let's hear more about Sony in the future. I was beginning to think DPR was ignoring Sony. For a couple days.

dont know why peple complaint so much about the menus... the A6300 have alot of costumization options, after setting the costumizable buttons, and setting the camera to your personal style of shooting, you almost never have to dive in the menus...

Menus at first glance are pretty crazy but I am happier to see Sony allowing for a great deal of important features. "Pro" cameras are often differentiated by having physical buttons/switches for key functions. Pro cameras are often noted as being expensive, as well.

Amazing review..for a new camera. I will never say A6300 will replace any dSLR for person like me..but anyone else, this is a real dSLR replacement. In fact, a dSLR lover like me, always take a mirrorless out for traveling and daily hiking.

Put on the 150-600 to A6300 and there is no significant in size and weight between DSLR and A6300. When you waiting to shoot some action the battery of this A6300 with be exhausted before you press the shutter.Yes, A6300 is very good camera, but it cannot replace DSLR completely.

So just use the Sony 70-400mm II. Remember, the A6300 is a crop sensor, so that acts like a 105-600mm with a faster max aperture, smaller size, and lighter weight. And yeah, throw a bunch of extra batteries in with that. They're cheap and weigh next to nothing.

The next thing to consider will be 1. buffer size 2. AF accuracy 3. AF tracking ability. 3. low light AF ability 4. high iso noise performance.If A6300 can solve all these problems, there won't be any place for a D500 or an upcoming 7dIII.

This is good thread. The a6300 gets a lot of things right (4k, sensor) and functions well for video and photo. A "proper" DSLR, however, will properly be easier to shot with in many cases: better battery life and more ergonomic fit and controls. Mirrorless also allows third party lenses because flange distance is no longer an issue.

The a6300 may work very well in some situations and be showing its limitations in other situations. I don't think the a6300 should be seen as the DSLR killer. From my perspective, as a videographer who also likes to take pictures, the a6300 is a compelling alternative to more expensive camera bodies.

Am I the only one that doesn't understand this being listed in so many camera reviews as a con? Even if they HAD included a stand-alone charger (which would admittedly charge much faster), you still can't charge two batteries simultaneously, and is equally as inconvenient. If you choose to buy spare batteries, you should be buying spare chargers as well or it will always be "hard to keep a spare battery charged."

The only consideration I could see is if you are shooting with the camera, and a spare is charging at home, but then that's not very useful as a spare battery, is it?

Some things in life can have advantages and disadvantages. We list both perspectives so that the reader can decide which is most significant to them.

Being able to USB charge can be handy but if the camera doesn't include an external charger, then you can't have a second one charging while you shoot (or you have to worry about swapping batteries over in the camera the night before).

I've clarified the phrasing on the Con to make the distinction clearer.

Equally, the a6300 does allow a decent amount of customization. That's a good thing. But the fact that it's pretty-much essential to customize the camera to make it usable (I think Eye-AF can't be accessed at all with the default settings) is a con.

Richard Butler wrote: "Being able to USB charge can be handy but if the camera doesn't include an external charger, then you can't have a second one charging while you shoot"

This sentence is bogus, dude. The camera doesn't also include a second battery so you don't even have a second battery that you need to charge. If you are planning to buy a second battery, you can buy a charger with it as as both the battery and charger are about $10

I own the Sony 18-105/4, 35/1.8 OSS, 50/1.8 OSS, and 55-210 OSS. I also own the Rokinon 12/2. All of the are APS-C, and they do great. If you want a wide angle, get the Sony 10-18 OSS. I don't get this "lacks an APS-C line-up" non-sense. Currently, Sony has 15 APS-C E-mount lenses. In comparison, Canon has 11 APS-C lenses (EF-S lenses). And Canon's system has been around a lot longer.

yes everone wants IBIS but there is no room in the small body of the a6000/6300 for it to fit. its a huge piece of hardware. they would have to redesign an entirely new body (in between the a7 and 6300 series size body) to make it even fit and the cost would be at least $200-300 more and the $999 MSRP price is a mind things that many wont pay to cross for a consumer / enthusiast camera. you are asking for IBIS but most wont pay for it on an APSC. I want it to but its not happening and it its also protection for their a7 series otherwise everyone would but a6300 and not a7 series cams and never upgrade unless they really needed to FF sensor and more shallow DoF that comes with FF

My camera already has IBIS built into it, I just move the SS dial to 1/250/500 depending on lens and I get pin sharp images, its amazing the technology they cram in these little blighters these days. I could not have done that 30 years ago......oh wait

salsaguy please come back to reality. Small cameras like the PL7 have IBIS.Samsung added IBIS for video without adding anything but a FW update. Sony A mount cameras also use electronic and Software for IBIS adding nothing to size.

HUH!?Considering the huge price differences it's very peculiar what body comparisons are made here. The pricepoint (at the top of the pack) and the ergonomics and lens landscape (at the very bottom of the pack) are NOT in the slightest bit appreciated in this conclusion. Oh well just saying. Tried 3 Nex/alpha milc bodies extensively the past years. The lens landscape and ergo sucked hard and there is no improvement. Period! Only some (overly expensive) non zooms are worth anything on 16 or 24 mp. Perhaps the only zoom that gets the heads up is the 10-18mm, at a price.

Mind you, I bought 3 bodies and a load of lenses the last 4 years. I wanted to like them. Also because of all the singing and dansing reviews. Every single time I was disgusted about the things I mentioned above and sold the stuff. Oh well.

I'm a long-time DSLR user who now also uses an A6000. I've traveled throughout Asia with one. Not sure what you're complaining about. I travel with Sony 18-105/4, 35/1.8 OSS, 50/1.8 OSS, Rokinon 12/2. All are fairly priced and optically excellent. No problems with the ergonomics either. To say that you are "disgusted" with your experience sounds dubious. I still have all my Canon DSLR gear, but it doesn't get much use anymore. My Sony gear travels better, delivers results that are comparable or better than my Canon gear, and the system is growing at a good pace. Overall, I'm darn happy with the system!

So really the E-mount has quite a few options.then there are the 200+ Canon EF lenses that focus like they were on a Canon body with an adapter.. Plus dozens of other adapted lenses

That is the REAL "lens Landscape"

BTW comparing a NEX 3 to the A6300 is like comparing a Canon Rebel 300 to a 7D the technology has changed significantly and if you read the review and tried out on at the store you might know.. oh wait they keep selling out! So I can see why you have not tried one yet.

Tied for best camera I have ever owned. And I have actually used a lot already but what do I know over a an experienced NEX 3 veteran. BTW I didn't even like any of the NEX models enough to buy.. This is not one of them

Going that route Sony E mount b and h 17 yes you can spend more than the camera to buy FF lenses but no thanks when m4/3 and Fuji lenses are very nice and less and don't add the extra size or weight. I thought that was the point over dslr or just going FF to have the weight and size savings. Sony is basically pushing you to just go FF or use it as a family snap shot camera with video. And please don't start with adapters and their added size, weight and limited functioning.

Exactly my experience: retained all my Canon FF gear which isn't used anymore. Have slightly different Sony lens set (see my profile), but overall experience (esp. during travel) is the same -- superb.

Having years of experience with 3 bodies, nex5n, next6 and alpha 6000 and several lenses and explaining my dislike is dubious? It's my real experience! Shooting slr for 42 years, Dslr for 16 years intensive. With gear from various makers. Some have to doubt my statements because they have a different opinion. That's ok. BUT, those that use stronger words are on my ignore list now. Yukkk! Get a life please. It's my strong feeling that ergonomics and UI of these bodies was hampering my use of them in a strong way. Anyone that have a different experience? Please chime in with some real and honest arguments. Happy shooting!

@perry rhodan - Yes, plenty of people have a different experience. Absolutely. Using my Sony A6000 certainly feels different from using my Canon DSLRs, but it's not necessarily in a worse way. I *greatly* appreciate its lighter weight, more compact size, and I've found that over the years DSLR grips have grown overly large. In fact, DSLR bodies, as a whole, have grown overly large. That's not really better for ergonomics. I find that I have less hand and body fatigue after shooting all day with my A6000 than I do with any of my Canon DSLRs. But, of course, you're just going to ignore anything I've said because you don't want to hear any real and honest arguments. You just want to say insightful stuff like, "Yukkk!" and "Get a life please" and "I was disgusted"!

@T3Usually I let this go, but I'm curious. Why so negative? All I want to produce and hear is honest arguments, as I stated clearly. You appear to twist words. You started the argument with calling my experience DUBIOUS! I really do not like that. Actually I do not accept that, because calling can lead to bullying.

It's my experience and I stated that explicitly. You are doing it again in the above post by saying things like "BUT OF COURSE YOU'RE JUST ....." etc". You are assuming all kind of things. You *greatly* appreciate several things. That's fine by me, glad you like it. You are comparing to DSLR bodies and like the lighter sony. That's also fine by me, glad you like it. That doesn't mean that I have to like it too. So you agree people can have different experiences. Can you agree also that this can lead to different opinions? see next>>

@T3BTW have a look at my shortlist of gear. Named my most/least liked there. I'm all in for superzooms, compacts, serious compacts, dslr, milcs apsc/m43. Next to the load of film camera's, too many ;-) The camera's I like stay with me, the others were sold or given away.

I really accept and adapt new technology. But until today, I don't have found any reason to use touch screen technology in my (semi-professional) photography. When digital cameras arrived, I said it is a revolution in photography: after ten years very few people will have film cameras in use (it was ab. AD 2002). Older film photographers said that will newer happen. Today, film photography is only for hipsters. I don't have anything against touch screens, but in my photography they don't have any place, create only errors in photos. If somebody likes it, so, let him / her be happy. Cheers.

Never understood people's enthusiasm for touchscreen until I used a 70D. It really does have its uses and can make navigating menus much easier. Its not a deal breaker but for a £1000 body only camera I thought Sony would go that route.

These are definitely short comings and require work-arounds. Even traditional film cameras at 24fps will have strict maximum panning speeds due to persistence of motion. Digital will not fix this limitation.

It looks good if only for the class leading or equalling (apparently) sensor and the AF performance.

It's a shame about the lenses.

If Sony are ready to boast about this being the most popular mirrorless camera ever, then why almost go out of their way to cripple the choice of lenses? If they had a focussed APSC lens roadmap (like say, Fuji) there would be almost no reason NOT to buy one of these.

I recently bought an A6000. The kit lens is not too bad but I also purchased a Fotodiosk Canon EF/EF-S adapter and a cheap Nikon F to Sony adapter that takes all my manual Nikkors from my film days. My old Canon EF-S 10-22mm has suddenly received a new lease of life! I use Canon 5Ds for all my heavy lifting but the A6000 has become a very versatile walk-around camera. I figure most purchasers will be using it as such rather than for their main camera. So, for anyone with Canon/Nikon glass, the absence of a wide choice of Sony lenses for the 6000/6300 shouldn't really be a big deal. Just invest in an adapter or two. The downside of course is that you don't get the AF functionality (the Fotodiosk adapter delivers it but it is too slow) but for my type of photography that is not an issue.

It can't be corrected. It's the lens' optics that cause the problem. Solution? Toss the lens in the garbage and pick up the old 18-55. Sure, it's bigger, but that's the point. It works better because the optics aren't compromised by being crammed into a tiny shell.

I don't see how you can rate a camera which has a clumsy user interface with a gold award. It makes the review irrelevant if you don't consider the user experience.

I always have this problem with high ratings for Sony and Panasonic cameras (which both have their moments of clunkyness in the user interface). If they require extensive customization, they simply aren't as much fun to use, however capable they are.

Says you. No issues here with the menu - plenty of fun to use, and then some. And complaining about the ability to extensively customize... really? It does have that Auto mode, you know, so you can keep it nice and simple ;)

With the exception of the Auto ISO implementations, in many ways Panasonic cameras have among the best photographer-centered user interfaces of any camera on the market. Many direct controls, and a touchscreen for selecting AF point even while using the EVF.

While I agree with the sentiment, I don't think Panasonic belongs in that category. I think they've done a better job than any other mirrorless manufacturer in terms of UI, which is why I continue to use them over Olympus, Fuji, or Sony.

Whilst I recognize user experience is subjective, I'm basing my criticism on the text of the review, not my own opinion of the controls. If the reviewer believes the user experience is sub par (and there are enough points making that clear) the camera shouldn't get a top rating, any more than it should if the technical aspects are sub par. Camera reviews shouldn't be a game of "Top Trumps"

@sgoldswo,You have a point. I think the Conclusion section is very outdated, and it needs to be revised by DPR.There should be several categories in the Conclusion (10 would be nice), and they should be graded numerically (not just bar graphs). Then the points can be added up to come up with the overall grade.

I have the Sony A6000, and I find the menu structure to be as described by the reviewer.Such menu might be OK if you have plenty of idle time to fiddle through settings, but not during demanding situations when you barely have a second or two to make changes.

Readers who have not used a Canon DSLR, for example, may not know the difference.IMHO, Canon had nailed the menu structure long ago.I don't know about Nikon because I haven't used their products in the past 15 years.

Having used mine now for over 2000 shots (not at highspeed) and over 12 hours there is nothing clumsy about it. Coming from an A77M2 I am surprised how easy it is to adapt to what I need. I know the DPR staff have a particular focus configuration they love from the A7 line.. this does not have that.. and they in other responses have made it pretty clear that is why they were frustrated.. which is fair.. but having never had that.. I don't miss it at all I have focus and exposure control that I need while shooting

UI is down to usage. I didn't like the UI of my A7 II but I have customized it to my needs quite well and I find it very quick to use in 99% of the situations. Its those 1% where I need to menu dive that I get frustrated with the menu system but that is rare.

So lets compare with its rivals. The A6300 competes with the 80D which doesn't have the DR of the A6300 or the burst rate or the video capabilities. The D7200 has slightly better IQ but is of larger size and has almost half the burst rate and is far behind in video.

And among its mirrorless peers, Panasonic and Olympus have some well specd cameras but they have smaller sensors and thus are behind in IQ while not being really any smaller than this camera.

Lastly there is Fuji which probably gives slightly better IQ but can't match the AF capabilities and are completely dead in the water w.r.t to the video capabilities.

I don't much like Sony menus and UI it's true (for the record, Olympus menus are worse, but the UI is much better) - but you've missed the point. The reviewer doesn't like Sony UI. So why is anyone who doesn't like the UI of a camera giving it a gold award?

^^ You missed the point. HE doesn't like the UI BUT that is very subjective. So he will accede very little weight age on such a subjective point.

What is NOT subjective i.e. IQ, features, performance etc is where maximum weightage is given and over there Sony has no real rivals at its exact price point. It beats hands down its rival DSLR cameras at that price point and by a much lesser margin beats the m43 rivals like the EM-5 but offers a larger sensor and thus better IQ.

The Fuji's offer slightly better IQ BUT can't match the AF and are completely outspeced in the video department.

There is still much love for the NEX-7, and well deserved. It comes from a time when Sony put their very best into it. New examples (when you can find them) still out-price the A6000.Results from the NEX-7 compare favorably with A6000/A6300 for landscape and portrait photography.

The NEX-7 was long outdated by the time the new comparison tool was added. The A6000 beats the NEX-7 in IQ, as the NEX-6 did slightly, as well. And the A6300 certainly beats the A6000 handily in low ISO because of 14-bit RAW, and high ISO because of dual gain conversion. It's actually good enough to hold its own against the A7 II.

I'm sure the 6300 improves upon image quality over the NEX 7, but by how much? From what I can see, referring to image quality alone, the gains may be noticeable but still seem not enough to warrant upgrade for me. I'm sure the speed and focus point increases are substantial but I don't need those.

For the past few weeks we've been running a series of polls to find out what you - our readers - think of the major product releases of 2016. It's time to announce the winners of the first round of voting! Read more

Man’s best friend isn’t necessarily the most cooperative portrait subject. After spending some time photographing dogs (and a few cats) awaiting adoption at a local shelter, we’ve learned some lessons and have a number of tips for better pet portraits. Read more

Latest in-depth reviews

The Canon G5 X Mark II earns a Silver Award with its very good image quality, flexibility and the overall engaging experience of using the camera. However, if you need the very best in autofocus and video, other options may suit you better. Find out all the details in our full G5 X II review.

360 photos and video can be very useful for certain applications (as well as having fun). The Vuze+ is an affordable 360 camera that supports both 2D and 3D (stereo vision) capture, and might be the best option for someone wanting to experiment with the 360 format.

The Mikme Pocket is a portable wireless mic with particular appeal to smartphone users looking to up their game and improve the quality of recorded audio without the cost or complexity or traditional equipment.

The 90D is essentially the DSLR version of the EOS M6 Mark II mirrorless camera that was introduced alongside it. Like the M6 II, it features a 32MP sensor, Dual Pixel AF, fast burst shooting and 4K/30p video capture. It will be available mid-September.

Latest buying guides

If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.

Whether you're hitting the beach in the Northern Hemisphere or the ski slopes in the Southern, a rugged compact camera makes a great companion. In this buying guide we've taken a look at nine current models and chosen our favorites.

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

Whether you're new to the Micro Four Thirds system or a seasoned veteran, there are plenty of lenses available for you. We've used pretty much all of them, and in this guide we're giving your our recommendations for the best MFT lenses for various situations.

Blackmagic has announced an update to Blackmagic RAW that adds support, via plugins, to Adobe Premiere Pro and Avid Media Composer. Blackmagic also announced a pair of Video Assist 12G monitor-recorders with brighter HDR displays, USB-C recording and more.

Sony has announced the impending arrival of its next-generation video camera system, the FX9. The full-frame E-mount system is set to be released later this year with a 16-35mm E-mount lens to follow in spring 2020.

The Canon G5 X Mark II earns a Silver Award with its very good image quality, flexibility and the overall engaging experience of using the camera. However, if you need the very best in autofocus and video, other options may suit you better. Find out all the details in our full G5 X II review.

The Fujifilm X-A7 is the newest addition to the company's X-series lineup. Despite its relatively low price of $700 (with lens), Fujifilm didn't skimp on features. Click through to find out what you need to know about the X-A7.

The entry-level Fujifilm X-A7 improves upon many of its predecessor's weak points, including a zippier processor, an upgraded user experience and 4K/30p video capture. It goes on sale October 24th for $700 with a 15-45mm F3.5-5.6 kit lens.

Robert Frank's unconventional approach to photography and filmmaking defied generational constraints and inspired some of the most influential artists of the 20th century. He passed away today at age 94.

All three devices offer a standard 12MP camera plus, for the first time on an iPhone, an ultra-wide 13mm camera module. The 11 Pro and 11 Pro Max also retain the telephoto camera of previous generations.

Phase One's new XT camera system incorporates the company's IQ4 series of digital backs with up to 151MP of resolution and marries them to a line of Rodenstock lenses using the new XT camera body. The result is an impressively small package for one of the largest image sensors currently on the market - take a closer look here.

Phase One has announced its new XT camera system, which includes an IQ4 digital back, body (made up of a shutter release button and two dials) and a trio of Rodenstock lenses. The company is marketing the XT as a 'travel-friendly' product for landscape photographers.